These people are saying to me, with this study they've done, that they understand the learning process well enough that they've reliabley been able to point out computers as a negative in the process.
Well, in my not so humble opinion, that's a load of horse manure.
If society understood the learning process well enough to pick out bits and pieces of it as effective or not, I might buy in to this load of manure more. But, kids all learn in different ways. What worked for me, may not for you. We all know this.
But these people say they've got it figured out, they can remove and account for all the other factors in a learning process, and point to a computer as being responsible for a score. Yeah. My ass.
That's the reason I'm not buying this. I don't have a particular stake in computers as good learning tools or not. Maybe they are, maybe they have a niche they can fill successfully. Are they a magic learning bullet? I doubt it. Are they bad enough they have this broad negative effect? I really doubt it.
__________________
I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence:
"My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."
|